Cosigned by the author I also include my two cents expounding on the cheque checker ML.
The most consequential failure mode — that both the text (...) and the numeric (...) converge on the same value that happens to be wrong (...) — is vanishingly unlikely. Even if that does happen, it's still not the end of the world.
I think extremely important is that this is a kind of error that even a human operator could conceivably make. It's not some unexplainable machine error, likely the scribbles were just exceedingly illegible on that one cheque. We're not introducing a completely new dangerous failure mode.
Compare that to, for example, using an LLM in lieu of a person in customer service. The failure mode here is that the system can manufacture things whole cloth and tell you to do a stupid and/or dangerous thing. Like tell you to put glue on pizza. No human operator would ever do that, and even if, then that's straight-up a prosecutable crime with a clear person responsible. Per previous analogy, it'd be a human operator that knowingly inputs fraudulent information from a cheque. But then again, there would be a human signature on the transaction and a person responsible.
So not only is a gigantic LLM matrix a terrible heuristic for most tasks - eg "how to solve my customer problem" - it introduces failure modes that are outlandish, essentially impossible with a human (or a specialised ML system) and leave no chain of responsibility. It's a real stinky ball of bull.
What the hell is this
Am I having a stroke? What does "functional programming in a network" even mean? Does it mean anything? Do you torrent lambdas?
You wouldn't download a closure
Weird ass names aside (Hoon sounds like a slur or is it just me?), they built two languages? Also what does "its" refer to here, Urbit's? From context it's as if Nock was Hoon's language, but that doesn't make semantical sense.
Also editorial note, just say "a pair" if there are two, not "a set"...
What. A "single-function operating system" doesn't even mean anything. Do they mean a unikernel? That at least is an actual term. And then what's that other thing? A "runtime implementation of an OS"? What's Arvo if it's not implemented or doesn't run, a fucking abstract painting of an OS?
And again, why do you need two languages to build this, it really seems you can have one? You're designing them from scratch anyway specifically to build this OS, why not make one proper language? Linus Torvalds barely had one and he managed.
What are we doing here.
What does any of this mean. Is it also a metaverse attempt? What the fuck is a planet in a network dude, would you call 123.73.41.0 more of an asteroid or a planetoid?
And now for a shot:
And chaser:
So they built an artificially complex architecture, to the point where half of its description sounds made up, took the most complex kinds software engineering projects (a programming language and an OS), did them twice for good measure, slapped on a blockchain to be cool and hip I guess, for absolutely no fucking reason whatsoever. They didn't have a use-case that would warrant any of this engineering effort, all they wanted was a message board, a problem we have solved in the fucking 90s (? Maybe earlier?).
But it's good enough for the Lich King and Egg Boi to give them a million fucking dollars. God I hope at least they boughy some quality drugs with that money or else this was a giant waste of resources.
Conclusion: the Wikipedia article on Urbit is absolute garbage. I feel like I know less about what the fuck this thing is after I read it. Can anyone tell me why any of this? Why did they do this? Why do they need a custom OS? Who hurt them so bad they came up with such shitty names for everything? Would you nock a hoon or is that too vere?
EDIT: Bonus question, how is this pronounced? Instinctively I read the U as in "uranium", but the article writes "an Urbit", so it's a short U like in "full"?